US President Donald Trump has unveiled his plans for a billion-dollar ballroom beneath the White House, prompting speculation that he has no intention of ever vacating the building.
On Tuesday, 19 May, the US leader gave members of the press a glimpse of the progress on the extravagant ballroom, stating that “the ballroom is really a shield and protecting all of the things that are built here.”
Trump revealed that the construction incorporates a military hospital and meeting rooms, with the structure extending approximately six storeys underground.
“Its all knit together. Between the drone proofing, the missile proofing and the drone capacity… it also has great snipper capacity,” he said.
The ambitious project has led a number of people to conclude that Trump is not intending to leave office.
Democratic Strategist Michelle Kinney posted on X: “It’s not a ballroom. It’s a bunker. He’s not leaving.”
A second X user wrote: “I’m starting to become convinced that Trump’s monomaniacal obsession with the ballroom/bunker is because he plans on barricading himself inside the bunker when his term is up.”
Another posted: “Trump is turning the White House into Mar-a-Lago 2.0 and he has no intention of ever leaving. It’s why Republicans are trying so hard to stop our votes.”
A fourth said: “Trump thinks he’s never leaving. He’s planning a bunker on U.S. tax payer money.”
Trump has insisted the ballroom is entirely funded by donors. Trump’s White House ballroom project suffered a setback just days prior, after a Senate parliamentarian ruled that Republicans could not include a provision in a bill that would redirect $1 billion in taxpayer money towards security upgrades for the project.
The funding proposal was inserted by Senate Republicans into a $72 billion budget bill for the Department of Homeland Security, following requests from GOP officials who stated the Secret Service had sought the funds.
Had the provision remained intact, it would have required only a simple majority to pass.
However, Elizabeth MacDonough, the nonpartisan parliamentarian, determined that the funding proposal breached budget reconciliation rules and would need to be revised or achieve a 60-vote threshold.
Republicans have since indicated they are working on amending their proposal.